logo
For America's 35M small businesses, tariff uncertainty hits hard

For America's 35M small businesses, tariff uncertainty hits hard

UPIa day ago
As of 2023, of those U.S. companies that import goods, more than 97% were small businesses. For these companies, tariff uncertainty is paralyzing. Photo by Elevate/ Pexels
Imagine it's April 2025 and you're the owner of a small, but fast-growing, e-commerce business. Historically, you've sourced products from China, but the president just announced tariffs of 145% on these goods.
Do you set up operations in Thailand -- requiring new investment and a lot of work -- or wait until there's more clarity on trade? What if waiting too long means you miss your chance to pull it off?
This isn't a hypothetical -- it's a real dilemma faced by a real business owner who spoke with one of us over coffee this past spring. And she's not alone. As of 2023, of those U.S. companies that import goods, more than 97% of them were small businesses. For these companies, tariff uncertainty isn't just frustrating -- it's paralyzing.
As a family business researcher and former deputy administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration and entrepreneur, we hear from a lot of small-business owners grappling with these challenges. And what they tell us is that tariff uncertainty is stressing their time, resources and attention.
The data backs up our anecdotal experience: More than 70% of small-business owners say constant shifts in trade policy create a "whiplash effect" that makes it difficult to plan, a recent national survey showed.
Unlike larger organizations with teams of analysts to inform their decision-making, small-business owners are often on their own. In an all-hands-on-deck operation, every hour spent focusing on trade policy news or filling out additional paperwork means precious time away from day-to-day, core operations. That means rapid trade policy shifts leave small businesses especially at a disadvantage.
Planning for stability in an uncertain landscape
Critics and supporters alike can agree: The Trump administration has taken an unpredictable approach to trade policy, promising and delaying new tariffs again and again.
Consider its so-called "reciprocal" tariffs. Back in April, Trump pledged a baseline 10% tariff on imports from nearly everywhere, with extra hikes on many countries. Not long afterward, it hit pause on its plans for 90 days. That period just ended, and the administration followed up with a new executive order July 31 naming different tariff rates for about 70 countries. The one constant has been change.
This approach has upended long-standing trade relationships in a matter of days or weeks. And regardless of the outcomes, the uncertainty itself is especially disruptive to small businesses. One recent survey of 4,000 small-business owners found that the biggest challenge of tariff policies is the sheer uncertainty they cause.
This isn't just a problem for small-business owners themselves. These companies employ nearly half of working Americans and play an essential role in the U.S. economy. That may partly explain why Americans overwhelmingly support small businesses, viewing them as positive for society and a key path for achieving the American dream. If you're skeptical, just look at the growing number of MBA graduates who are turning down offers at big companies to buy and run small businesses.
But this consensus doesn't always translate into policies that help small businesses thrive. In fact, because small businesses often operate on thinner margins and have less capacity to absorb disruptions, any policy shift is likely to be more difficult for them to weather than it would be for a larger firm with deeper pockets. The ongoing tariff saga is just the most recent example.
Slow, steady policies help small-business owners
Given these realities, we recommend the final negotiated changes to trade policy be rolled out slowly. Although that wouldn't prevent businesses from facing supply chain disruptions, it would at least give them time to consider alternate suppliers or prepare in other ways. From the perspective of a small-business owner, having that space to plan can make a real difference.
Similarly, if policymakers want to bring more manufacturing back to the United States, tariffs alone can accomplish only so much. Small manufacturers need to hire people, and with unemployment at just over 4%, there's already a shortage of workers qualified for increasingly high-skilled manufacturing roles.
Making reshoring a true long-term policy objective would require creating pathways for legal immigration and investing significantly in job training. And if the path toward reshoring is more about automation than labor, then preparing small-business owners for the changes ahead and helping them fund growth strategically will be crucial.
Small businesses would benefit from more government-backed funding and training. The Small Business Administration is uniquely positioned to support small firms as they adjust their supply chains and manufacturing -- it could offer affordable financing for imports and exports, restructure existing loans that small businesses have had to take on, and offer technical support and education on new regulations and paperwork.
Unfortunately, the SBA has slashed 43% of its workforce and closed offices in major cities including Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, New Orleans and Los Angeles. We think this is a step in the wrong direction.
Universities also have an important role to play in supporting small businesses. Research shows that teaching core management skills can improve key business outcomes, such as profitability and growth.
We recommend business and trade schools increase their focus on small firms and the unique challenges they face. Whether through executive programs for small-business owners or student consulting projects, universities have a significant opportunity to lean into supporting Main Street entrepreneurs.
Thirty-five million small businesses are the engine of the U.S. economy. They are the job creators in cities and towns across this country. They are the heartbeat of American communities. As the nation undergoes rapid and profound policy shifts, we encourage leaders in government and academia to take action to ensure that Main Streets across America not only endure but thrive.
The authors would like to thank Gretchen Abraham and Matt Sonneborn for their support.
Peter Boumgarden is a professor of family enterprise at Washington University in St. Louis and Dilawar Syed is an associate professor of instruction, Department of Business, Government and Society at the University of Texas at Austin This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions in this commentary are solely those of the authors.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump doesn't oppose Netanyahu plan for full Gaza occupation: U.S. officials
Trump doesn't oppose Netanyahu plan for full Gaza occupation: U.S. officials

Axios

time15 minutes ago

  • Axios

Trump doesn't oppose Netanyahu plan for full Gaza occupation: U.S. officials

President Trump does not oppose Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's plan to launch a new military operation to occupy the entire Gaza Strip, U.S. and Israeli officials say. Why it matters: The Israeli Security Cabinet is expected to approve on Thursday a highly controversial plan to expand the war. According to the sources, Trump has decided not to intervene and to let the Israeli government make its own decisions. The big picture: The new operation to occupy additional areas of central Gaza, including Gaza City, is expected to take at least several months and involve displacing around 1 million Palestinian civilians. The Israel Defense Forces would also be moving into areas where Israel believes hostages are being held, possibly risking their lives. Netanyahu is poised to escalate the war despite massive international pressure to stop the fighting and prioritize the humanitarian crisis in the enclave — and over the objections of his own top generals. What they're saying: Two U.S. officials tell Axios Trump won't intervene in the Israeli decision-making around the new operation. When asked on Tuesday about a possible Israeli full occupation of Gaza, Trump said: "I really can't say. It is going to be pretty much up to Israel." Netanyahu and his aides claim Hamas isn't interested in signing a comprehensive ceasefire and hostage deal on terms Israel can accept, and that only military pressure can change that. "We are not willing to remain in the current limbo and we are not willing to surrender to Hamas' demands — so essentially only one option is left, to take a drastic step. This is the last card we have left," a Netanyahu aide told Axios. Behind the scenes: One U.S. official said Trump was moved by the video released by Hamas of an Israeli hostage digging his own grave. "It influenced the president, and he is going to let the Israelis do what they need to do," the official said. At the same time, the U.S. official said the Trump administration doesn't support Israeli annexation of parts of Gaza — another possibility discussed by Israeli officials. Between the lines: The IDF has been reluctant to attack the areas in Gaza that the new plan focuses on for fear of accidentally killing hostages. According to Israeli officials, IDF Chief of Staff Gen. Eyal Zamir told Netanyahu such a move would endanger the hostages and could lead to Israeli military rule in Gaza with full responsibility over 2 million Palestinians. "You are walking into a trap," Zamir told Netanyahu in a meeting on Tuesday, according to multiple reports in the Israeli press. It appears that Netanyahu was unmoved. Split screen: The White House plans to focus in the coming weeks on addressing the starvation crisis in Gaza, though the expansion of the war would make that more difficult. In a meeting Monday evening at the White House, Trump and special envoy Steve Witkoff discussed plans for the U.S. to significantly increase its role in providing humanitarian aid to Gaza. "The United States remains committed to helping alleviate the situation in Gaza and is supportive of efforts to increase humanitarian aid. However, the United States is not 'taking over' the aid effort," a U.S. official told Axios. What to watch: The Trump administration plans to increase its funding to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) in order to open new aid centers in parts of Gaza to which displaced Palestinians will be relocated, both in north and central Gaza, sources say.

Trump officials eye Indiana as redistricting war intensifies
Trump officials eye Indiana as redistricting war intensifies

The Hill

time15 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Trump officials eye Indiana as redistricting war intensifies

The Trump administration is turning its attention to Indiana as Republicans look for other red states to follow Texas's lead in the building redistricting battle. Vice President Vance is visiting Indianapolis on Thursday to meet with Gov. Mike Braun (R) amid chatter about potential mid-cycle redistricting in the Hoosier State. Braun has said there are no commitments at the moment, but left the door open for the matter to come up at the meeting. The visit suggests Indiana could be one of the next states on the GOP's list to move forward with redrawing congressional maps, though it's unclear whether Indiana Republicans have the appetite for it. 'They are completely rewriting the implied rule book,' Pete Seat, a GOP strategist and former communications director for the Indiana Republican Party, said of the redistricting push. 'It's a Pandora's box, because if you do it in Texas, you do it here, you do it in some other red states. What's going to happen in the blue states? They're going to respond in kind. And then you have a redistricting arms race, and I don't know where that ends,' Seat said. Vance's visit to Indianapolis comes amid escalating drama over a proposed redraw in Texas, where a plan backed by President Trump could net Republicans five House seats ahead of next year's high-stakes midterms. Texas Democrats fled the state over the weekend, breaking quorum in a last-ditch bid to stall the state legislature from moving forward. Meanwhile, the developments in the Lone Star State have had a domino effect across the country. In calling for the Texas changes last month, Trump floated that 'there could be some other states' on the table. The Trump administration's political allies were quietly exploring options in Indiana late last month, Punchbowl News reported. And the Indy Star reported on Wednesday that Vance was expected to talk to state leaders about a potential redraw. Braun's office confirmed to The Hill that the governor is set for a private meeting with Vance on Thursday to discuss a number of topics, without specifying whether redistricting is on that agenda. Vance's team also said that the vice president will 'discuss a variety of issues' with Braun and state officials while in town to headline a Republican National Committee fundraiser, according to a statement obtained by NewsNation, The Hill's sister station. 'At the end of the day, it's up to Braun and the state legislature. But … I'm sure [redistricting] is going to be touched upon, because it's a situation where you would be, if the opportunity presents itself based on the law, on the data, etc, then you'd be foolish not to try to take advantage of it,' said GOP strategist Ford O'Connell, a former Trump White House and campaign surrogate. Asked on Tuesday whether he'd call for a special session if the vice president asked him to do so for redistricting, the Indiana governor told reporters that 'whatever we discuss there, and if that topic comes up, it's exploratory.' 'So there's been no commitments made other than, I think they're going to come into every state that's got the possibility of that happening, and obviously you can see in Texas how that's eventuated,' Braun said, according to WXIN, a NewsNation affiliate. To change the maps, Braun would need to call a special session of the state General Assembly, where Republicans boast a supermajority — and they'd have to act quickly to make it happen before the midterms. 'My guess, if I had to guess, would be that JD Vance would try to sort of take the governor's temperature on the likelihood of a special session being called,' said Steven Webster, a political science professor at the University of Indiana in Bloomington. O'Connell argued that it would be wise for Vance and Braun to have a conversation about the options, 'because if the shoe was on the other foot, the Democrats would be having that conversation if they hadn't already eaten up all the Republican seats.' Republicans hold seven of the state's nine congressional seats, but some think the GOP could get at least one more. 'That seems kind of like a small thing. But on the other hand, when the balance of power is often so tight in Washington, I think there's probably value in getting any seats that you possibly could if you're a political party,' Webster said. Redrawn Indiana lines would likely squeeze Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-Ind.) in the northwest, while Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.) may be somewhat safer in his district around Indianapolis. 'It is no surprise that some believe redistricting is the only option to cling to power when they know the American people are rejecting the damage done by the House Republican Majority,' Mrvan said in a statement on potential Indiana redistricting, arguing it would be 'reprehensible' to call the state Assembly in for a special session on the matter. Other Indiana Democrats have pushed back strongly against the possibility. 'Sending the Vice President here to beg for another Congressional seat is beyond absurd,' Indiana Democratic Party Chair Karen Tallian said in a statement. State Rep. Matt Pierce said in a statement from the state House Democratic caucus that Trump and Vance are 'desperate' if they think that 'having seven of the nine seats in Indiana held by Republicans is not enough.' Whether Vance ultimately raises the matter during his visit or not, it remains unclear whether Indiana Republicans would want to pursue it. 'We know that redistricting is expensive. And we had just done this back in 2021,' said Carly Schmitt, a political science professor at Indiana State University, pointing to redistricting efforts after the 2020 census. 'If we're thinking about the need to shore up more Republican [power] either at the state level or the congressional level, it's already happened.' Indiana has an 'A' grade in the Gerrymandering Project's report card for its latest round of congressional redistricting, while Texas has an 'F' grade. 'My sense is there will be – and is – hesitation regarding this idea. Because Republicans in this state take great pride in how we redistrict,' Seat said. 'You're not hearing a lot of excitement for this idea that the way you have seen and heard it in Texas.' But Indiana isn't the only sign that the Trump administration is looking for redistricting opportunities beyond the Lone Star State. Missouri Republicans have signaled openness to redistricting after the state House Speaker pro tem reportedly got a call from the White House last month, according to the Missouri Independent. Ohio is set to redistrict due to state requirements, and Florida Republicans have also floated a redraw in Texas's stead. Meanwhile, Democrats are looking to counter would-be GOP gains by weighing redistricting in blue strongholds, including New York and California. The Golden State's Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has said he's moving forward with a plan to put redistricting before voters this fall, contingent on what happens in Texas. 2024 Election Coverage The talk of tit-for-tat redistricting and the potential for other states to get involved threatens to roil next year's midterms, as Republicans defend their slim 219-212 majority in the House. 'I mean, it could very well end with the exact same margin that we have now,' Seat said. If Texas moves forward, prompting California and other states, he added, 'I think it's just going to be a tit-for-tat until every single deadline hits.'

Americans now support corporate activism again: Survey
Americans now support corporate activism again: Survey

Axios

time15 minutes ago

  • Axios

Americans now support corporate activism again: Survey

U.S. adults' stance on corporate activism has flip-flopped, according to a Wednesday Bentley University-Gallup report. Why it matters: After years of decline in support, more Americans across demographics and political affiliations want businesses to take a public stance on hot-button topics including free speech, immigration policy, diversity, climate change and health care issues. "The data underscore an important insight for businesses," the report said. "What they say, and who they say it to, matters." By the numbers: 51% of U.S. adults in the May survey said they believe companies should take public stances on current issues, per the poll. That's a 13 percentage point increase from last year and a reversal of a downward trend that began after 2022. Flashback: Last year, 38% of respondents said they thought business should take a public stance on current events. At that point, the biggest drops in sentiment were within groups of people who were previously the most receptive — Democrats, Americans under 45, Black Americans and Asian Americans. State of play: Now, 71% of Democrats and 33% of Republicans support businesses taking public stances. Support for business has risen for them to take a public stance on free speech, immigration policy and international conflicts. The intrigue: While Americans support businesses speaking out publicly, they're more apprehensive about their own employers communicating on most topics.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store